This work shows how both frequency and the election of path loss model affect estimated spectral efficiency. Six different frequency bands are considered, ranging from 2.6 GHz in the ultra high frequency (UHF) band to 73 GHz in the millimeter wave bands (mmWaves), using both single‐slope and two‐slope path‐loss models. We start by comparing four urban path loss models for UHF: the urban/vehicular and pedestrian test environment from the ITU‐R M. 1255 Report, which includes the two‐slope urban micro line‐of‐sight (LoS) and NLoS, from the ITU‐R 2135 Report. Then, we consider mmWaves taking into consideration the modified Friis propagation model, followed by an analysis of the throughput for the 2.6, 3.5, 28, 38, 60, and 73 GHz frequency bands. We have found that the signal‐to‐interference‐plus‐noise ratio, as estimated with the more realistic two‐slope model, is lower for devices that are within the break‐point of the transmitter, which is a small distance in the UHF/SHF band. As a result, spectral efficiency is higher with mmWaves than with UHF/SHF spectrum when cell radius is under 40 m but not when cells are larger. Consequently, mmWaves spectrum will be more valuable as cells get small. We also find that capacity as estimated with the two‐slope model is considerably smaller than one would obtain with the one‐slope model when cells are small but there is little difference in the models when cells are larger. Thus, as cells get smaller, the use of one‐slope models may underestimate the number of cells that must be deployed.

中文翻译：

---

传播模型对小型蜂窝网络容量的影响：UHF / SHF与毫米波频段的比较

这项工作说明了频率和路径损耗模型的选择如何影响估计的频谱效率。考虑了六个不同的频带，使用单斜率和两斜率路径损耗模型，范围从超高频（UHF）的2.6 GHz到毫米波频带（mmWaves）的73 GHz。我们首先比较UHF的四种城市路径损耗模型：ITU-R M.1255报告中的城市/车辆和行人测试环境，其中包括来自美国的两坡度城市微视线（LoS）和NLoS。 ITU‐R 2135报告。然后，我们考虑毫米波，同时考虑到改进的Friis传播模型，然后分析2.6、3.5、28、38、60和73 GHz频带的吞吐量。我们发现信噪比，根据更现实的两斜率模型估计，对于发射机断点内的设备，该值较低，而在UHF / SHF频带中，这是一个很小的距离。结果，当单元半径小于40 m时，mmWaves的频谱效率高于UHF / SHF频谱，但当单元较大时，频谱效率不高于UHF / SHF频谱。因此，随着细胞变小，毫米波频谱将更有价值。我们还发现，当单元较小时，用两斜率模型估计的容量要比使用单斜率模型所估计的容量小得多，但是当单元较大时，模型的差异就很小。因此，随着单元的变小，使用单斜率模型可能会低估必须部署的单元的数量。在UHF / SHF频段中距离很小。结果，当单元半径小于40 m时，mmWaves的频谱效率高于UHF / SHF频谱，但当单元较大时，频谱效率不高于UHF / SHF频谱。因此，随着细胞变小，毫米波频谱将更有价值。我们还发现，当单元较小时，用两斜率模型估计的容量要比使用单斜率模型所估计的容量小得多，但是当单元较大时，模型的差异就很小。因此，随着单元的变小，使用单斜率模型可能会低估必须部署的单元的数量。在UHF / SHF频段中距离很小。结果，当单元半径小于40 m时，mmWaves的频谱效率高于UHF / SHF频谱，但当单元较大时，频谱效率不高于UHF / SHF频谱。因此，随着细胞变小，毫米波频谱将更有价值。我们还发现，当单元较小时，用两斜率模型估计的容量要比使用单斜率模型所估计的容量小得多，但是当单元较大时，模型的差异就很小。因此，随着单元的变小，使用单斜率模型可能会低估必须部署的单元的数量。我们还发现，当单元较小时，用两斜率模型估计的容量要比使用单斜率模型所估计的容量小得多，但是当单元较大时，模型的差异就很小。因此，随着单元的变小，使用单斜率模型可能会低估必须部署的单元的数量。我们还发现，当单元较小时，用两斜率模型估计的容量要比使用单斜率模型所估计的容量小得多，但是当单元较大时，模型的差异就很小。因此，随着单元的变小，使用单斜率模型可能会低估必须部署的单元的数量。